4 ms·

There was no executive order. Turning off Tiktok yesterday was a highly successful political stunt.

by ipsum2 2y ago

kotaKat 2y ago
Bingo, bango, boingo. Just another way to help manipulate people into thinking Trump saved the day, once again. TikTok played the propaganda just right.
- Xmd5a 2y ago
  - The Occupy Wall Street movement. - A COINTELPRO-inspired diversion undermines the cause: during demonstrations, individuals wishing to speak must wait in line, while women, minorities, and other groups are prioritized. - This method becomes widespread in media narratives over the next 15 years, fueling focus on these topics and deepening societal divisions while bankers slip under the radar. - Initially driven by billionaires, the movement is soon co-opted by financial firms, corporations, and government entities. - Ultimately, Trump is reinstated, while Zuckerberg, Gates, Bezos, and, to some extent, Altman align with Thiel and Musk, reversing their previous stances with a dramatic 180° shift. The oligarchy endures.
- notfed 2y ago
  It's funny to imagine how, very deeply ironically, it turned out to be a national security risk after all.
kj4ips 2y ago
There is, it's a few days old, and it's a non-enforcement from the Biden administration, according to the man himself and his staffers, he intends to let it be the next administration's problem. Whatever the next administration does when it takes power is yet to be seen. The restrict act was written really strangely, and I assume Oracle required some assurance from someone to not just delete Bytedance's accounts and resources.
- qingcharles 2y ago
  That wasn't an executive order, as far as I'm aware it was just a statement. It had no legal value, which was why TikTok asked for more assurance. The fine to each company (Apple, Google, Oracle, TikTok) was in the order of around $5bn each if they kept the lights on, so I would be hesitant to keep it running too without something in writing.
  - grajaganDev 2y ago
    Right. The Legal teams at Apple and Google will follow the existing law as written. No EO from Trump will change that.
  - wumeow 2y ago
    If TikTok was concerned that Biden’s statement wouldn’t be honored, they wouldn’t have turned service back on today while Biden is still president. They’ve had months to work out some sort of deal with Trump, this whole show they’ve put on the past couple days is propaganda.
    - qingcharles 2y ago
      I have to agree with this. If they'd waited until Monday it would have been different, but legally nothing changed overnight except more puffery.
- ipsum2 2y ago
  The title was changed, it used to be "Trump's executive order..." something.
wumeow 2y ago
Everyone got played by what is effectively joint CCP/Trump propaganda and they’re cheering about it. Bleak, bleak, bleak.
- jsheard 2y ago
  Especially given that Trump initiated the push to ban TikTok in the first place.
  - aaronbrethorst 2y ago
    Until he didn’t because a major donor to him has a 15% stake in it. https://www.politico.com/news/2024/03/14/trump-tiktok-billionaire-donors-00146892 https://www.politico.com/news/2024/03/14/trump-tiktok-billio...
34679 2y ago
"Biden just signed a potential TikTok ban into law. Here’s what happens next" https://www.cnn.com/2024/04/23/tech/congress-tiktok-ban-what-next/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2024/04/23/tech/congress-tiktok-ban-what... "Biden Signs a Bill That Could Ban TikTok. Now Comes the Hard Part." https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/23/technology/bytedance-tiktok-ban-bill.html https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/23/technology/bytedance-tikt... "Biden signed a bill to force a sale of TikTok or ban it. What’s next?" https://www.politico.com/news/2024/04/24/biden-signs-tiktok-bill-00153984 https://www.politico.com/news/2024/04/24/biden-signs-tiktok-... "Biden signs a bill that could ban TikTok — after the 2024 election" https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/congress-biden-bill-ban-tiktok-when-2024-election-rcna148792 https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/congress-biden-bil...
- Capricorn2481 2y ago
  So not an executive order, but signing a bill that passed with a veto proof majority, and then saying he won't enforce it. And to prove how much of a stunt this was from TikTok, they turned their services back on less than 24 hours later even though nothing had changed.
  - 34679 2y ago
    What does being veto-proof have to do with it? No president has to sign a bill just because Congress can override him if he doesn't. His signature is literally an endorsement.
    - Capricorn2481 2y ago
      > His signature is literally an endorsement Yes, but we're not arguing about whether Biden agreed with the bill, but that turning it off was a stunt on TikTok's part. Someone said there was an executive order, but there was not. He said he wouldn't enforce it, obviously signaling that it's up to the incoming administration. The fact that TikTok turned off for only 12 hours makes it pretty obvious they wanted to have a good relationship with Trump by giving him some positive PR. Which is ironic considering banning it was primarily pushed by Trump to begin with, but people have obviously forgotten that.
whimsicalism 2y ago
spin working overtime

There was no executive order. Turning off Tiktok yesterday was a highly successful political stunt.

by ipsum2 2y ago

There was no executive order. Turning off Tiktok yesterday was a highly successful political stunt.

Bingo, bango, boingo. Just another way to help manipulate people into thinking Trump saved the day, once again. TikTok played the propaganda just right.

Xmd5a 2y ago
- The Occupy Wall Street movement. - A COINTELPRO-inspired diversion undermines the cause: during demonstrations, individuals wishing to speak must wait in line, while women, minorities, and other groups are prioritized. - This method becomes widespread in media narratives over the next 15 years, fueling focus on these topics and deepening societal divisions while bankers slip under the radar. - Initially driven by billionaires, the movement is soon co-opted by financial firms, corporations, and government entities. - Ultimately, Trump is reinstated, while Zuckerberg, Gates, Bezos, and, to some extent, Altman align with Thiel and Musk, reversing their previous stances with a dramatic 180° shift. The oligarchy endures.
notfed 2y ago
It's funny to imagine how, very deeply ironically, it turned out to be a national security risk after all.

kj4ips 2y ago

There is, it's a few days old, and it's a non-enforcement from the Biden administration, according to the man himself and his staffers, he intends to let it be the next administration's problem. Whatever the next administration does when it takes power is yet to be seen. The restrict act was written really strangely, and I assume Oracle required some assurance from someone to not just delete Bytedance's accounts and resources.

qingcharles 2y ago
That wasn't an executive order, as far as I'm aware it was just a statement. It had no legal value, which was why TikTok asked for more assurance. The fine to each company (Apple, Google, Oracle, TikTok) was in the order of around $5bn each if they kept the lights on, so I would be hesitant to keep it running too without something in writing.
- grajaganDev 2y ago
  Right. The Legal teams at Apple and Google will follow the existing law as written. No EO from Trump will change that.
- wumeow 2y ago
  If TikTok was concerned that Biden’s statement wouldn’t be honored, they wouldn’t have turned service back on today while Biden is still president. They’ve had months to work out some sort of deal with Trump, this whole show they’ve put on the past couple days is propaganda.
  - qingcharles 2y ago
    I have to agree with this. If they'd waited until Monday it would have been different, but legally nothing changed overnight except more puffery.
ipsum2 2y ago
The title was changed, it used to be "Trump's executive order..." something.

wumeow 2y ago

Everyone got played by what is effectively joint CCP/Trump propaganda and they’re cheering about it. Bleak, bleak, bleak.

jsheard 2y ago
Especially given that Trump initiated the push to ban TikTok in the first place.
- aaronbrethorst 2y ago
  Until he didn’t because a major donor to him has a 15% stake in it. https://www.politico.com/news/2024/03/14/trump-tiktok-billionaire-donors-00146892 https://www.politico.com/news/2024/03/14/trump-tiktok-billio...

34679 2y ago

"Biden just signed a potential TikTok ban into law. Here’s what happens next" https://www.cnn.com/2024/04/23/tech/congress-tiktok-ban-what-next/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2024/04/23/tech/congress-tiktok-ban-what... "Biden Signs a Bill That Could Ban TikTok. Now Comes the Hard Part." https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/23/technology/bytedance-tiktok-ban-bill.html https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/23/technology/bytedance-tikt... "Biden signed a bill to force a sale of TikTok or ban it. What’s next?" https://www.politico.com/news/2024/04/24/biden-signs-tiktok-bill-00153984 https://www.politico.com/news/2024/04/24/biden-signs-tiktok-... "Biden signs a bill that could ban TikTok — after the 2024 election" https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/congress-biden-bill-ban-tiktok-when-2024-election-rcna148792 https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/congress-biden-bil...

Capricorn2481 2y ago
So not an executive order, but signing a bill that passed with a veto proof majority, and then saying he won't enforce it. And to prove how much of a stunt this was from TikTok, they turned their services back on less than 24 hours later even though nothing had changed.
- 34679 2y ago
  What does being veto-proof have to do with it? No president has to sign a bill just because Congress can override him if he doesn't. His signature is literally an endorsement.
  - Capricorn2481 2y ago
    > His signature is literally an endorsement Yes, but we're not arguing about whether Biden agreed with the bill, but that turning it off was a stunt on TikTok's part. Someone said there was an executive order, but there was not. He said he wouldn't enforce it, obviously signaling that it's up to the incoming administration. The fact that TikTok turned off for only 12 hours makes it pretty obvious they wanted to have a good relationship with Trump by giving him some positive PR. Which is ironic considering banning it was primarily pushed by Trump to begin with, but people have obviously forgotten that.

whimsicalism 2y ago

spin working overtime